New Bill Risks Transforming Egypt’s Media into Mouthpiece of the Regime

This post originally appeared on PEN.org on July 14, 2015.

A proposed anti-terrorism bill in Egypt threatens to criminalize the publication of any news that contradicts the government’s official narrative regarding “terrorist operations” in the embattled North African country. Article 33 of the draft law, reportedly approved on July 1 by the Egyptian cabinet in the absence of a parliament and awaiting final passage by the president, prescribes jail terms of up to two years for journalists whose coverage disputes or contradicts official government reports on matters of terrorism, which the bill defines loosely. If passed, the law will effectively bar both local and foreign journalists in Egypt from producing balanced and thorough reporting, limiting them to only one source: the repressive government of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

Egyptians have been riding a political roller coaster since the Tahrir Square protests of 2011 that led to the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak after nearly 30 years in power. Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsi then served just over a year in the presidency before a July 2013 coup d’etat that reinstated a military government with Sisi at its helm. During these transitions, restrictions on press freedoms have been alternately loosened and tightened, resulting in a situation today where more journalists than ever before are jailed in Egypt, according to theCommittee to Protect Journalists. Reporters targeted by the regime—like the three Al-Jazeera journalists detained for over a year, among many others—are often accused of being agents of the Brotherhood, a party that has again been outlawed under Sisi.

Terrorist attacks reportedly carried out by ISIS and other jihadi militant groups have also been on the rise in Egypt since Morsi was removed from office. On July 1, 2015—the same day the new anti-terrorism bill was approved by the cabinet—attacks in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula sparked heavy fighting between Islamic State-affiliated militants and Egyptian soldiers. Government sources reported less than 20 military casualties; local and foreign media, including Al Jazeera, reported upwards of 50. The attack came just days after a car bomb in Cairo killed the country’s top prosecutor, Hisham Barakat. An attack on the Italian consulate early Saturday morning that left one dead and nine injured has bolstered supporters of the new bill, who have insisted it is a necessity to “protect national security.”

The draft law was returned for further review last week after an outcry by the Egyptian Journalists Syndicate over Article 33, which creates the restriction on non-official narratives. (The new Egyptian Constitution stipulates that a poll will be held in the Syndicate during the drafting of any legislations related to journalism, but the provision had not been heeded in the cabinet’s hasty approval of the anti-terrorism bill.) While Article 33 is among the most egregious provisions of the new draft law, the bill also lists more than 25 additional crimes, including “promoting terrorism” on social media, that have not been adequately examined or debated. While the government has said it will reconsider Article 33, it insists that the law in its entirety would exist only to “defend citizens from wrong information” and not to limit media freedoms.

But in a country where just four years ago the media helped usher in a short-lived era of reform, Article 33 risks transforming Egypt’s local and foreign media into regime mouthpieces, or forcing them to cease operations entirely. The proposed anti-terrorism law threatens to fundamentally alter the recording and telling of Egyptian history, erasing the multiple perspectives that have enriched one of the world’s most storied civilizations.

Empiricism
 and 
Attitudes


My 
Experience
 as 
an 
Intern
 with
 Iraq
 Veterans
 Against
 the
 War


This article originally appeared in the 2010 NYU Hagop Kevorkian Center Review.

When
 I
 walked
 in
 for
 my
 first
 day
 as
 an
 intern
 with
 Iraq
 Veterans
 Against
 the
 War,
 I
 had
 little
 idea
 of
 what
 to
 expect.
 
 With
 a
 background
 in
 communications,
 I
 had
 come
 to
 the
 [NYU] Kevorkian
 Center
 in
 hopes
 of
 someday
 helping
 to
 educate
 the
 American
 public
 and
 affect
 U.S.
 foreign
 policy
 change
 in
 the
 Middle
 East
 through
 the
 development
 of
 public
 outreach
 curricula
 and
 PR
 campaigns
 for
 use
 by
 non‐profits
 and
 NGOs.
 A
 marketing
 internship
 within
 the
 American
 movement
 for
 peace
 in
 the
 Middle
 East
 seemed
 like
 a
 good
 place
 to
 start,
but
 veterans
 seemed
 far
 removed 
from
 the 
equation.

I 
was
 pleased
 to
 find 
that, 
despite 
the 
crude 
humor
 and
 military 
mannerisms, 
IVAW 
occupies
 a
 respected
 niche
 in
 the
 movement.
 The
 national
 organization
 of
 post‐9/11
 veterans
 and
 active‐duty
 service
 members
 opposes
 the
 U.S.
 wars
 in
 and
 occupations
 of
 Iraq
 and
 Afghanistan,
 straddling
 a
 wide 
variety
 of 
goals 
and 
issues:

• Immediate
 withdrawal
 of 
all 
occupying
 forces
 in 
Iraq 
and
 Afghanistan
• Reparations
 for
 the
 human
 and
 structural
 damages
 suffered
 by
 Iraq
 and Afghanistan,
so 
that
 their
 peoples 
may
 regain
 the 
right
 to
 self-determination
• Full
 benefits,
 adequate
 physical
 and
 mental
 healthcare,
 and
 other
 supports
 for
 returning
 servicemen
 and
 women

As
 a
 veterans’
 organization,
 IVAW
 offers
 a
 unique
 credibility
 and
 the
 potential
 to
 reach
 an
 audience
 wider
 than
 the
 traditional
 peace‐loving
 left.
 IVAW
 co‐founder
 Tim
 Goodrich
 explained,
“When
 the
 average
American
 hears
 a
 veteran—somebody
 who
 has
 seen
 combat
 and
 knows
what
 it
 means—people
 listen,
 more
 than
 they
 do 
to
 anyone
 else,
 because
this
 is
 somebody
 who
 has
 been
 on
 the
 ground,
 knows
 what
 the
 realities
 are,
 knows
 what
 these
 things
 mean.”
 My
 job
 is
 to
 help
 veterans
 harness
 their
 potential
 through
 media:
 I
 develop
 educational
 materials
 and
 fact
 sheets
 that
 teach
 communication
 skills
 like
 talking
 to
 reporters,
 writing
 op‐eds,
 and
 drafting
 press
 releases.
 This
 approach
 allows
 veterans
 to
 effectively
 share
 their
 stories 
in 
their
 own,
unfiltered
 voice.
The
 position
 also
 encompasses
 internal
 communications,
 sharing
 news
 from
 the
 national
 office
 through
 audio
 podcasts,
 posters and
 fliers,
 and
 social
networking 
websites 
like 
Twitter
 and
 Facebook.

The
 value
 of
 the
 IVAW
 internship
 program
 lies
 in
 its
 reciprocity.
 As
 a
 low‐budget
 non‐ profit,
 IVAW
 relies
 on
 volunteers
 to
 perform
 roles
 like
 communications.
 My
 education,
 experience,
and
 insight
 into
 the 
field
 helps 
to 
satisfy
 a 
crucial
 need
 for
 the 
organization.
 As
 a
 graduate
 student
 of
 Near
 Eastern
 Studies,
 I
 seek
 new
 perspectives
 from
 which
 to
 study
 the
 region.
 IVAW
 offers
 an
 angle
 I
 might
 never
 have
 considered
 in
 an
 academic
 setting:
 unabashedly
 American,
 but
 ready
 to
 admit
 its
 backwardness.
 IVAW’s
 attempt
 to
 both
 understand
 and
 undermine
 the
 institutionalized
 American
 stereotypes
 of
 Arabs,
 Muslims,
 and
 the
 Middle
 East
 may
 not
 qualify
 as
 academic,
 but
 is
 essential
 to
 changing
 American
 attitudes,
 curbing
 violent
 U.S.
 intervention
 in
 the
 region,
 and
 building
 constructive
 relationships
 with
 Middle
 Eastern
 states
 and
 peoples.
 
 This
 empirical
 understanding
 may
 prove 
just
 as 
important
 as 
anything 
available 
in 
the 
classroom.